RE: Kitsap County

> > On Sat, 11 Dec 2004 18:43:00 -0500, Jim Henry wrote:
> > >Do you  really believe that a government entity, with no
> > >capitalistic incentive, is  going to do a better job and provide
> > >better performance than commercial *LECs  motivated by profit and
> > >accountable to their stockholders?  It's a noble  thought but I
> > >think this concept was proved out a failure in all of Eastern
> > >Europe in the last 50 years or so in just about everything
> > >enterprise the govt  undertook.  We see mostly the same
> > >inefficiencies here when comparing a  govt. run enterprise to a
> > >private commercial one. There are a few exceptions to  every rule of
> > >course, but they are only exceptions. Jim

Okay, so I'm coming in a little late but I wanted to respond to this.

Jim asked "Do you  really believe that a government entity... is going to do 
a better job and provide better performance than commercial *LECs...?"

Do a better job *at what?*  The for-profit companies will surely do 
everything they can to deliver optimum results... to their shareholders.  
There is zero incentive for Comcast or Qwest to "care" about us.  We have no 
choice, no voice, and no alternative.  We're imprisoned in this market.  
Unless we move, they own us.  And if we do move, all we do is trade Qwest 
for SBC or Verizon, which isn't so tempting.

Society has made the decision, and it's one I agree with, that basic 
services like electricity and water shall be provided to the general public 
at a reasonable cost.   As the pipe has fattened the "essentialness" of 
services the *LECs offer has become diluted, but the core argument -- that 
services shall be provided "for the greater good" still holds.

Would you rather drink the tap water we've got now, coming from a local 
government agency with no incentive to cook the books and please Wall 
Street?  Or would it be better for consumers if we turned that operation 
over to a for-profit company?  Maybe one that doesn't even have any 
employees in our State, and thus won't be directly affected when they cut 
corners to boost their profits while endagering our health?  Or to put it 
another way, how many Union Carbide execs died at Bhopal?

This is not to say there is no place for profit... but I think if history 
has taught us anything, it's that we're greedy and lazy (central tenets of 
Capitalism).  Qwest has receipts on the order of a billion dollars a month.  
That's over a million dollars per hour.  When there's that much money 
flowing by, and the stakes so high with all the Wall Street brokers to be 
kept happy, the temptation to do wrong is just too great.  The profit motive 
ultimately eclipses all other concerns; to paraphrase Vince Lombardi "profit 
isn't everything, it's the only thing."

I do not see how society benefits when essential services such as water and 
electricity (and "data" and voice and health care and 911 and libraries and 
roads) are done to please stockholders rather than to please citizens.

Free markets work.  Much of what's wrong with the telcos and cablecos (and 
healthcare, but I digress) is that the market is anything but free, 
consumers have no choice, and the 800 lb. gorillas stomp around their 
respective terrirories, doing everything they must to keep the game rigged 
in their favor.  Which is perfectly understanable, the shareholders wouldn't 
be too thrilled to learn there's another pig lined up at "their" trough.

Just my two cents.

Ian


_______________________________________________
Talk mailing list
[email protected]
http://seattlewireless.net/mailman/listinfo/talk